[ACS41][DISCUSS] Options for us to deal with the 2.x to 4.x

[Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>]

upgrade problems
Reply-To: 

OK - So we are being inundated with 2.x to 4.1 upgrade problems.

I see two options:

1) Someone(s) step up to fully test this upgrade path, and resolve
issues that are known (plus those that are found while testing).  We
would wait to release 4.1 until this is all set.

2) We drop support for this upgrade path and require an incremental
upgrade to the last 3.x version before you can do 4.1.

I want option 1, but it requires someone to step up and drive it to
closure.  I know that many of the people that might be in the best place
to help drive this to closure are off and working on brandy-new
features, but isn't (a) upgrade something we consider critical and (b)
getting the current feature release target more important?

-chip

RE: [ACS41][DISCUSS] Options for us to deal with the 2.x to 4.x

[Shashi Dahal <s....@leaseweb.com>]

Hi Chip, 

You are correct. 
4.1 is the only release after 2.2.14 that has support for Advance Networking with Security Groups. 
Option 2  to require an upgrade to anything else will break the production platform, so it not an option at all. 

Cheers,
Shashi



-----Original Message-----
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com] 
Sent: Friday, 3 May, 2013 5:34 PM
To: <de...@cloudstack.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [ACS41][DISCUSS] Options for us to deal with the 2.x to 4.x

And actually, for option 2 I think it's worse than I said.  I'd argue that these issues are probably blocking upgrades to the 3.x line anyway.

On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com> wrote:
> upgrade problems
> Reply-To:
>
> OK - So we are being inundated with 2.x to 4.1 upgrade problems.
>
> I see two options:
>
> 1) Someone(s) step up to fully test this upgrade path, and resolve 
> issues that are known (plus those that are found while testing).  We 
> would wait to release 4.1 until this is all set.
>
> 2) We drop support for this upgrade path and require an incremental 
> upgrade to the last 3.x version before you can do 4.1.
>
> I want option 1, but it requires someone to step up and drive it to 
> closure.  I know that many of the people that might be in the best 
> place to help drive this to closure are off and working on brandy-new 
> features, but isn't (a) upgrade something we consider critical and (b) 
> getting the current feature release target more important?
>
> -chip

Re: [ACS41][DISCUSS] Options for us to deal with the 2.x to 4.x

[Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>]

And actually, for option 2 I think it's worse than I said.  I'd argue
that these issues are probably blocking upgrades to the 3.x line
anyway.

On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Chip Childers
<ch...@sungard.com> wrote:
> upgrade problems
> Reply-To:
>
> OK - So we are being inundated with 2.x to 4.1 upgrade problems.
>
> I see two options:
>
> 1) Someone(s) step up to fully test this upgrade path, and resolve
> issues that are known (plus those that are found while testing).  We
> would wait to release 4.1 until this is all set.
>
> 2) We drop support for this upgrade path and require an incremental
> upgrade to the last 3.x version before you can do 4.1.
>
> I want option 1, but it requires someone to step up and drive it to
> closure.  I know that many of the people that might be in the best place
> to help drive this to closure are off and working on brandy-new
> features, but isn't (a) upgrade something we consider critical and (b)
> getting the current feature release target more important?
>
> -chip

Re: [ACS41][DISCUSS] Options for us to deal with the 2.x to 4.x

[Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>]

On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 11:33:11PM +0800, Wei ZHOU wrote:
> I am working on 2319 and 2322. Hope to resolve them Monday.
>

Wei - thank you for all of the work you have been doing!

Re: [ACS41][DISCUSS] Options for us to deal with the 2.x to 4.x

[Wei ZHOU <us...@gmail.com>]

I am working on 2319 and 2322. Hope to resolve them Monday.